Re: Connecting those interested in getting GT.M into the Debian repositories
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 09:29:34AM -0400, Alan O'Neill wrote:
> Thanks for the tips on SVN -- very helpful!
> When last I wrote, I had begun to think that you and I were working with
> one different assumption, and from what you just wrote, it is now
> confirmed. The package I have built is not a source package, it is a
> binary package. I have compiled GT.M from source in the past, but it
> has an interesting twist: To build GT.M from source, you must already
> have the binary installed on your machine because somehow the binary is
> used to help with the build. (I've always gotten a kick out of that --
> how was the very first version of GT.M compiled? :)
Well, this was previousely discussed. You somehow need to have a GT.M
installed on the system and then you build the first binary package.
For past discussions probably this is the best link:
> To continue, I'll need to learn more about building source packages --
> it's something I've never done before.
To make it clear: For official Debian we are *only* talking about
source packages which are turned into binary packages using the Debian
packaging tools which are based on dpkg-buildpackage and its wrappers
like debuild, pdebuild or others.
A source package consists of the original source tarball and a debian/
directory which contains the files which are needed to build the binary
package. That is what we are talking about as "building a package".
It is documented in several places and probably this is the best entry
> One thing that does occur to me, though, is that since building GT.M
> requires the binary installation, it may be necessary to distribute a
> binary package as well.
See above the link to the discussion thread on debian-devel list.